Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 Ohio App. 3d 280 - In Re Webb

64 Ohio App. 3d 280 - In Re Webb’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Williams · Jordan v. Arizona · Leichtamer v. American Motors Corp. · 70 Ohio App. 2d 117 - In Re Bibb · In re Fassinger

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “There is no question that appellant [Webb] in the instant case had actual notice of the proceedings, appeared, defended, and was given a full opportunity to be heard. Appellant does not argue that he was unaware of the nature of the proceedings. Further, appellant was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings. * * * Because the record clearly demonstrates that appellant had actual notice of the proceedings, fully understood his rights and the nature of the proceedings, and participated throughout, the first assignment of error is overruled.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.